Good CPU's for Gaming + Multitasking

[zinton]

The title pretty much says it all. All reviews of cpu's are just solely based on gaming but I and some other people have about a million other thing running in the background that could affect performance.

[Tmh85]

Budget?

[WoodenMarker]

Most cpus with 4 or more cores are good for that.

[TheActualFunkMan]

If you're on a budget then AMD FX-6300 if not then AMD FX-8320

[MilkyWhite]

FX 8320, FX 8350, Xeon E3 1230.

[Andrew0472]

4670k, xeon chips aren't bad, 8320 or 8350 are good for gaming and streaming etc

[PillowSmoke]

FX 8320, FX 8350, 4670k.

[colec18]

I would recommend an AMD FX-8350 or 8320 because they have 8 cores and aren't super expensive.

[Faa]

I can run tons of virtual machines on a quadcore and a game. Hate if people claim theyre multitasking a lot and need more cores so just get a 4670k. 8350's are awful for gaming and streaming as well since we have proper alternatives for it.
 

 

I would recommend an AMD FX-8350 or 8320 because they have 8 cores and aren't super expensive.

5-%10 more multithreading performance isnt worth it and it's awful for gaming. You get much more for your money with an i5.

[Demonking]

I7 4770K

[Kuzma]

I can run tons of virtual machines on a quadcore and a game. Hate if people claim theyre multitasking a lot and need more cores so just get a 4670k. 8350's are awful for gaming and streaming as well since we have proper alternatives for it.

 

 

 

5-%10 more multithreading performance isnt worth it and it's awful for gaming. You get much more for your money with an i5.

8350/8320 = i5 in gaming. Hell with more multi-threaded games coming out, it's better.

[yourdad165]

Use a fourth generation intel core i5 or i7 processor. The intel core i5 4670 is the processor I have and it performs very well. If you're willing to spend the extra money though you can get the intel core i7 4770.

 

Links: Intel core i5 4670 http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=65&item_id=060640

          Intel core i7 4770 http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=65&item_id=060638

 

If you are looking to overclock though then you might want to consider the intel core i5 4670K or the intel core i7 4770K

[Opcode]

Budget would put you at possibly a i3-4330, it may only have two cores but offers four threads. So it can handle as much work as a i5 can simultaneously, just without as much performance per thread. On the gaming side of things, these i3's get the best of even the FX-8350 in most games. Tho if you are really budget, possibly a 750k would be a better option.

[Faa]

8350/8320 = i5 in gaming. 

 

Prove where an 8320 is equal to an i5 in a CPU bound scenario where the GPU isn't the limiting factor. Which you can't obviously because you're going against the facts. A GPU bound scenario is supposed to be gpu bound where the cpu doesnt matter a fuck so it's irrelevant to bring that up or soon we're going to benchmark i5 & 8350's with Furmark.

 

Hell with more multi-threaded games coming out, it's better.

 

Which is a delusion. Before we see more games than Crysis 3 (which is atm the only game) that can take advantage of 8 cores we'll have Broadwell that will close the 10% multithreading performance gap between the current i5 & 8350. 

[Kuzma]

 

Prove where an 8320 is equal to an i5 in a CPU bound scenario where the GPU isn't the limiting factor. Which you can't obviously because you're going against the facts. A GPU bound scenario is supposed to be gpu bound where the cpu doesnt matter a fuck so it's irrelevant to bring that up or soon we're going to benchmark i5 & 8350's with Furmark.

 

 

Which is a delusion. Before we see more games than Crysis 3 (which is atm the only game) that can take advantage of 8 cores we'll have Broadwell that will close the 10% multithreading performance gap between the current i5 & 8350. 

 

CURRENT i5 VS 8350 ._. . FarCry 3 which is also based on an engine very similar to CryEngine 3 also takes advantage of more than 4 cores. Frostbite is another engine that takes advantage of more than 4 cores. If you look at the large amount of indie games coming out on CryEngine 3 those extra cores look quite nice, if you look at the amount of games coming out on Frostbite 3 those extra cores yet again look quite nice. This entire situation is irrelevant since we also have to take into account drivers, AMD drivers work best on Intel CPUs and Nvidia drivers on AMD CPUs due to the fact that they are well multi-threaded.

 

I'm not ignoring the facts, you simply don't know about enough of them OR are simply ignoring them making your previous statement quite ironic .

[Demonking]

CURRENT i5 VS 8350 ._. . FarCry 3 which is also based on an engine very similar to CryEngine 3 also takes advantage of more than 4 cores. Frostbite is another engine that takes advantage of more than 4 cores. If you look at the large amount of indie games coming out on CryEngine 3 those extra cores look quite nice, if you look at the amount of games coming out on Frostbite 3 those extra cores yet again look quite nice. This entire situation is irrelevant since we also have to take into account drivers, AMD drivers work best on Intel CPUs and Nvidia drivers on AMD CPUs due to the fact that they are well multi-threaded.

 

I'm not ignoring the facts, you simply don't know about enough of them OR are simply ignoring them making your previous statement quite ironic .

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/111882-the-4670k-or-3570k-vs-8350-aggregate-comparison/ 

 

How can you recommend an FX 8320 over an I7 4770K let alone an I5 

[Faa]

CURRENT i5 VS 8350 ._. . FarCry 3 which is also based on an engine very similar to CryEngine 3 also takes advantage of more than 4 cores. Frostbite is another engine that takes advantage of more than 4 cores. If you look at the large amount of indie games coming out on CryEngine 3 those extra cores look quite nice, if you look at the amount of games coming out on Frostbite 3 those extra cores yet again look quite nice. 

Ok I'll take your word that Far Cry 3 is heavily multithreaded like you said since its engine is simliar to Cryengine 3 and the i7 having 3 more fps: http://cdn.overclock.net/7/7a/500x1000px-LL-7ae60bb9_FC3-Test-CPUs.png

Any reasons why the i5 outperforms the 8350 massively in a game where it's like you said multithreaded optimized? Why is the i3 3220 outperforming the phenom x6 in a game thats heavily multithreaded?

Because a game is that sexy multithreaded doesn't mean the 8350 would outperform an i5. 8350's@5GHz dont even come close to an i5 in Crysis 3 where its made to be sure the cpu was the limiting factor -> http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5135/27/amd-fx-9590-and-fx-9370-review-amds-return-to-the-high-end-market-benchmarks-hd-7970-crysis-3-1920x1080-high 

At medium settings the difference gets bigger between the 9590 & i5.

BF4 almost a difference of 15 fps:

 

 

This entire situation is irrelevant since we also have to take into account drivers, AMD drivers work best on Intel CPUs and Nvidia drivers on AMD CPUs due to the fact that they are well multi-threaded.

If you claim something like this with no proof then you're just flapping some nonsense out. Screenshot I included in this post proves you wrong.

 

 

I'm not ignoring the facts, you simply don't know about enough of them OR are simply ignoring them making your previous statement quite ironic   .

I have to say pretty much the exact same thing about you but this time it's backuped with a source atleast.

[Kuzma]

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/111882-the-4670k-or-3570k-vs-8350-aggregate-comparison/ 

 

How can you recommend an FX 8320 over an I7 4770K let alone an I5 

You seem to have not taken in anything I just said, all those benches are old single threaded games, I'm talking about now and the future. I'm not going to continue what I thought was an intelligent discussion if you disregard everything I just spent the time to type out.

[Kuzma]

 

I have to say pretty much the exact same thing about you but this time it's backuped with a source atleast.

The source you posted isn't exactly the most reliable benchmark and others would care to disagree, tbh I can't be bothered to talk to a brick wall so meh whatever stick to whatever the fuck you want to believe. Note - I don't swear often, ignorance pisses me off.

[Demonking]

You seem to have not taken in anything I just said, all those benches are old single threaded games, I'm talking about now and the future. I'm not going to continue what I thought was an intelligent discussion if you disregard everything I just spent the time to type out.

the OP ask for a good gaming & multitasking CPU & the I5 4670K & I7 4770K are the best options an 8320 please 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26UKz42uQ1Y#t=0

[Kuzma]

the OP ask for a good gaming & multitasking CPU & the I5 4670K & I7 4770K are the best options an 8320 please 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26UKz42uQ1Y#t=0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIVGwj1_Qno

 

See I too can pull out benchmarks that show the 8350/20 winning, streaming is an example of multi-tasking as the CPU has to run the game whilst actively encoding and uploading video to a server.

 

>_> Benchmarks essentially mean nothing since there are such variable results, as I said, I'm done here.

[Demonking]

 

See I too can pull out benchmarks that show the 8350/20 winning, streaming is an example of multi-tasking as the CPU has to run the game whilst actively encoding and uploading video to a server.

 

>_> Benchmarks essentially mean nothing since there are such variable results, as I said, I'm done here.

so in your mind an 8320 beats in I7 4770K in multitasking please stop 

[Kuzma]

so in your mind an 8320 beats in I7 4770K in multitasking please stop 

I have "proof" so, what's there to stop with?

Anyone can pull "proof" of someone doing random benchmarks that support their point.

Actual knowledge of software, how it works and hardware and how it works is the only thing that can decide in a situation of a stalemate.

By very definition having more cores means multi-tasking will be better, by nature of parrallelisation. Whilst the 8320 has weaker cores than a 4770k they're not THAT much weaker and before you call me a fanboy or anything along those lines >_> I'm running a Xeon.

[Demonking]

I have "proof" so, what's there to stop with?

Anyone can pull "proof" of someone doing random benchmarks that support their point.

Actual knowledge of software, how it works and hardware and how it works is the only thing that can decide in a situation of a stalemate.

By very definition having more cores means multi-tasking will be better, by nature of parrallelisation. Whilst the 8320 has weaker cores than a 4770k they're not THAT much weaker and before you call me a fanboy or anything along those lines >_> I'm running a Xeon.

Read this post than come back to me no way an 8320 beats an I7 4770K in multitasking 

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/111882-the-4670k-or-3570k-vs-8350-aggregate-comparison/

 

he asked for the best CPU and an I7 4770K is far better 

[Kuzma]

Read this post than come back to me no way an 8320 beats an I7 4770K in multitasking 

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/111882-the-4670k-or-3570k-vs-8350-aggregate-comparison/

 

he asked for the best CPU and an I7 4770K is far better 

And yet again my post was obviously not read. Benchmarks do not mean anything.